Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Meet Utah's Next Big Thing, Congressman Mia Love

Mia Love is now a household name since her stellar speech yesterday at the Republican National Convention opening night.
Mrs. Love is running for congress in Utah's fourth congressional district. The only one currently in the hands of a Democrat, Jim Matheson.
Although not for long for Rep. Matheson.
Mrs. Love is, if you want to go there, a minority, within a minority, within a minority.
What do I mean?
Well, the obvious is Mrs. Love is Black. The daughter of Haitian immigrants that came to the United States for the proverbial better life. They got it and then some. And got to see their daughter graduate the University of Hartford. What is wonderful is the story Mrs. Love tells about her dad telling her this after her college orientation:

 "Mia, your mother and I never took a handout. You will not be a burden to society. You will give back."

Understand that these people were from Haiti, the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere. They could have easily gone the dependency route was they arrived in the United States in 1973. But they did not and instilled that important value in their daughter.
The second minority is being a Black member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Understand that until the late 1970s, the Mormons did not allow Black men to rise in the lay-ministry that separates the Mormons from other Christian denominations. Since  seeing the light and really understanding the Holy Bible, the growth of Mormons, especially Blacks, is very impressive. But in the United States, there are really not that many Black Mormons.
And the third minority is being a Black Mormon woman. No doubt on that one.
And roll it all together and this is all happening in Utah, one of the most White and religious states in the nation.
OK, so what makes Mrs. Love think that she can be a great congressman? Hell, just a congressman?
Well, she is mayor of her home town, Saratoga Springs, Utah.
Saratoga Springs?! Never heard of it.
Seriously, I never heard of it until yesterday.
But she has been mayor of a town basically built from scratch.
Saratoga Springs was incorporated in 1997 and according to the 2000 census, there were but 1,003 people in the whole town. But by 2010, the population exploded to 17,781. A huge increase. And as a city council member, Mrs. Love did change the way taxes were collected from agriculture to a municipal tax. And when there was the economic debacle of 2008, taxes were not raised but expenses cut. And the city has a AA+ bond rating, the highest for a city of the size of Saratoga Springs.
And what guides Mrs. Love's political positions? According to her own words:

"Is it affordable. Is it sustainable. Is it my job?"

And Mrs. Love believes in fiscal discipline, limited government and personal responsibility.
Pretty conservative and Republican, isn't it?
Yes, it is!
And to understand a little something of the town she is mayor of, it is in Utah County, the most Republican county in the United States. And like the rest of the state, probably very White. And yet this woman has been elected mayor of her home town.
I always believe that is very easy for a minority to win in gerrymandered districts in which their particular group is the majority. The real test for a minority person is to run and win where they are nowhere near the majority.
Ask Rep. Allan West. Or Rep. Tim Scott. Both Southern, Black Republicans that ran and won in pretty White districts. Oh, and Rep. Scott? He only defeated one of Strom Thurmond's sons in the GOP primary in 2010.
How about Nikki Haley, governor of South Carolina? An Indian-American. Same for Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.
And how can we forget Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida? And soon to be Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas?
And, God willing, we can and must add Mia Love to that list. She will make an outstanding congressman and set the old Black establishment back on its heels. I would love, no pun intended, when Congressman Love joins the Congressional Black Caucus as she has promised to do for her to be right next to the Devil herself, Rep. Mad Maxine Waters, and as Mrs. Love says, "take that thing apart from the inside out”. Of course she can start with Rep. Mad Maxine.
Here is where you and I can help Mrs. Love out to not just fight but win the Utah fourth congressional district. And if you missed the speech, it is right here. Mrs. Love made more sense in four minutes than a certain occupier of the White House has made in four years.
Lets all work together to make sure this political studette can get to Washington. President Romney and Vice-President Ryan will need people like Mia Love to pursue the reform agenda.

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

What Is The Thursday Surprise At The GOP Convention

It appears that there is going to be something happening in Tampa, Florida on Thursday at some arena known as the Tampa Bay Times Forum.
Well, a bunch of people are meeting and they have the elephant as their symbol. Why they are pretty much shutting the city and environs down until then.
And some guy with a touch of gray yet slicked-back black hair is supposed to make some big speech.
But at some point, there is supposed to be this surprise that no one seems to know about.
OK, yes, I am writing about the Republican National Convention. And their symbol. And the biggest speech of one Mitt Romney's political life.
But now there is talk of some "mystery speaker" as Ed Morrissey puts it over at Hot Air.
Allahpundit at the same site adds to the mystery.
Jim Geraghty adds to it in The Morning Jolt.
So, what is it about?
Amazingly with compacting the convention from four to three days, somehow there is a hole in the prime time schedule. Thus there is a part on the schedule in which is "To be announced".
So, speculation is rampant.
Who will it be? Who can it be? What will that person say?
So Mr. Morrissey offers a purely political list here:

  • Governor Rick Perry
  • Herman Cain
  • Fred Thompson
  • Michele Bachmann
  • Rush Limbaugh
  • Sarah Palin

  • Well, it is an interesting list. But I just can not see any of those names making a special appearance. Especially Mrs. Palin. There is no way Team Romney is going to be upstaged. And no doubt, Mrs. Palin would do just that.
    Rush Limbaugh? Also do not see that happening.
    Sooo, here's a good thought from Allahpundit.
    Nancy Reagan.
    Interesting. But I am not sure that she will be up to the rigors of even a short endorsement speech. After all Mrs. Reagan is a frail 90 years old. She has limited her public appearances to events around the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. But I like the thinking.
    And Allah throws out an interesting name in that of Clint Eastwood.
    Now Mr. Eastwood is and has been a Republican as long as I can remember. He has endorsed Mr. Romney. And he is one Hollyweird star that is so established he does not give a damn.
    I give you Mr. Geragthy from The Morning Jolt newsletter:

    The Wall Street Journal gives us something to talk about for the next three days:
    Republican convention planners appear to have a surprise planned for those tuning in Thursday night.

    Buried deep in the convention schedule released Monday is a vague reference to a mystery speaker scheduled for the event's final evening. "To Be Announced" has a prime speaking slot late in the Thursday program.

    By then, speakers from Mitt Romney's church will have taken the stage that night. The co-founder of Staples office-supply chain will have spoken about working with Mr. Romney during his time at Bain Capital. State officials from Massachusetts will have talked about the former governor. Olympians will have already thanked the presidential candidate for leading the 2002 Winter Games.

    The only other speakers to follow "To Be Announced" will be Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mr. Romney himself, suggesting that the unnamed guest may appear during the 10 p.m. hour when the networks all will be broadcasting the convention.

    The good folks at the Journal offer a poll of potential mystery guests, but most are unrealistic: former Georgia Democratic senator Zell Miller, well-armed rocker Ted Nugent, CIA director David Petraeus, former first lady Nancy Reagan, heroic pilot Chesley Sullenberger . . .
    . . . or Sarah Palin.

    As they used to sing on Sesame Street, "One of these things is not like the other, most of these things are kinda the same . . ."

    I have no inside information (yet), but at dinner with my NR colleagues, I pointed out that Palin is glaring by her absence from the program -- I mean Huckabee's speaking, and it's been longer since his name appeared on a ballot -- and that a surprise appearance would probably make the assembled delegates go nuts.

    Of course, Nick Schultz came up with the only idea that could excite the crowd even more: "Hologram Reagan a la Tupac?"

    (If you don't understand the reference, the deceased rapper appeared to "perform" at the Coachella Valley Music & Arts festival through the use of a hologram. Details here.)

    The next to last paragraph about Hologram Reagan is I think the coolest thought of the mystery speaker of all. And do read the link Mr. Geraghty provided to understand the cultural context.
    I am not sure it is going to be that big of a deal. Mitt Romney is always known as a play it safe kind of guy. But he did choose Paul Ryan to be his vice-president. That was semi-expected. Maybe he would be wise to make a play for young voters in reminding them of the last real leader the United States really had in Ronald Reagan.
    Who knows?
    But it will keep us guessing all the way to Thursday won't it?

    Ann Romney And Gov. Chris Christie Hit It Out Of The Park

    On night one of the abbreviated Republican National Convention, Mitt Romney was formally nominated for president and Paul Ryan for vice-president.
    That was a foregone conclusion.
    So what drama, if any, was there to have?
    Well, two very important people had to make the speeches of their lives and they came through with flying colors.
    Ann Romney, Mitt Romney's wife of 42 years made a very strong impression on those in the Tampa Bay Times Forum and I think to the largest audience of her life. No, she did not have to go on about having a tough life. She has not and neither has Mr. Romney. But their parents did. And she spoke about that. About her Welsh grandfather who came to the United States when her father was 15 years old. She talked about the man that she knows and loves, Willard Mitt Romney. She spoke about everyday challenges of all Americans. Especially American women. But mostly, she talked about what it is like being with the man she loves and his relationship with her and their five children together. And she was the soft side of Mr. Romney that many Americans want to see.
    As a side note, I find it somewhat off putting that a "soft side" has to be shown of the people that are politically fighting to be the president of the United States and leader of the free world. There is something about the way it was, many a moon ago it seems, when we did not know all this stuff. I think it made leaders stronger. But the United States has changed and it is a necessary evil if you will in today's political landscape.
    While Mrs. Romney was the soft side of Mitt Romney, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie brought with him the hammer and fired up a crowd that is waiting to get out there and take the fight to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
    Gov. Christie spoke of the three-plus years as governor of one of the Bluest of Blue states and rattled off a stellar list of accomplishment. But it was not so much a pat on his back, and yup, it is a big back, but to make a point. And he said it quite well here:

    We ended an era of absentee leadership without purpose or principle in New Jersey.
    It's time to end this era of absentee leadership in the Oval Office and send real leaders to the White House.
    America needs Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and we need them right now.
    There is doubt and fear for our future in every corner of our country.
    These feelings are real.
    This moment is real.
    It's a moment like this where some skeptics wonder if American greatness is over.
    How those who have come before us had the spirit and tenacity to lead America to a new era of greatness in the face of challenge.
    Not to look around and say "not me," but to say, "YES, ME."
    I have an answer tonight for the skeptics and the naysayers, the dividers and the defenders of the status quo.
    I have faith in us.

    I really like the beginning of this. Addressing the lack of leadership in Washington. From The Dear Leader, President Obama on down to the Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Dingy Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to the House Minority Leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). To the lack of truly working with the Republican majority in congress. To try to find any common ground on anything.
    And he also addresses that fact that Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan are ready to not only tell the truth about things but lead. To make choices that will not be popular at first. But will have long-term benefit for the United States.
    I had my doubts about Gov. Christie being the keynote speaker at this convention, but all doubt was washed away with a rousing speech that got the party faithful ready.
    And that is what the Republican party needs.
    To be ready. To be ready to show the United States and yes the world that it will not be business as usual in Washington, D. C. if Team Romney & Ryan win the election in November.
    To be ready to make the unpopular choices that lay ahead.
    To be ready to reaffirm the United States unique role in the world. Not the cowardice and delegitimizing of that role by the current occupant of the White House.
    To be ready to stand by our friends and to be respected, not loved, by our foes.
    It will be a tough campaign, but Willard Mitt Romney in the past several weeks has shown that he has that fire. That he wants to be be the president of the United States. The commander-in-chief. Since asking Rep. Ryan to be his nominee for vice-president, Mr. Romney has become absolutely energized at a level I never saw in 2008. Even in stages of this current campaign. But now, he is electric on the campaign trail.
    Tonight, Ann Romney gave us a more personal look at Mitt Romney. Chris Christie gave us the look and determination of a strong leader that Mitt Romney is and will need to be if so fortunate to be elected the 45th president of the United States.

    Tuesday, August 21, 2012

    Now That Todd Akin Is Doing The Martyr Thing, What Can The Missouri GOP Really Do?

    This Todd Akin dude is really unfreakingbelivable.
    I mean, does he not get it?
    Dude, is is not a change of word here or that you did not mean to diminish rape or anything like that.

    “Well, you know, uh, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, ‘Well, how do you – how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. You know, I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

    I went through a much as I could to try to explain how douchbrained this whole thing is.
    Because as I noted, he could have just answered the question, this one from Charles Jaco:

    “Okay, so if an abortion can be considered in the case of, say, tubal pregnancy or something like that, what about in the case of rape? Should it be legal or not?”

    Simple answer, no. And he did not need to give his "scientific" reasoning behind it. Of course I did offer what every Republican candidate should say when getting bogged down in these social issue questions. But, Sweet Todd Akin, the man who could single-handily cost the Republican party the senate, no he said the above ridiculous quote.
    But enough of that.
    Now that Sweet Todd Akin is doing the martyr thing, what can Missouri Republicans do?
    First, I am not so certain that Mr. Akin may nor end up leaving the race.
    After all, he did make an apology. He even made a commercial. Hell, even his wife is apologizing for him.
    Now Mr. Akin may want to see if all of that ends up shoring support or bleeding it.
    Consider that the National Republican Senatorial Committee is not going to spend a red-hot cent on this dude. Karl Rove and his Crossroads group, not one centavo or peso on him. Everyone of consequence on the conservative side is telling him, uh dude, please leave. And that includes the Tea Party. The only viable financial support Mr. Akin will be able to muster at this point is fellow So Cons. And maybe they will not want to touch this guy more radioactive politically than the Fukushima nuke plant in Japan.
    I would have to say that at this point, the bleeding is pretty bad.
    My hunch is that Mr. Akin wants to do two things for a while.
    One, see if he is still really competitive against the Democrat incumbent Dear Leader, President Obama, sycophant Clarie McCaskill. Polling has to be done from the point the interview became public. According to the Real Clear Politics polling average, Mr. Akin is actually ahead of Sen. McCaskill by about five percent. The only good news is that Sen. McCaskill has not polled anywhere near 50% and certainly not anywhere north of that magic number. But if Sen. McCaskill makes any substantive gains and or Mr. Akin's numbers free-fall, it does make it harder to justify himself as the choice of the Missouri Republican voters.
    Which BTW, in a crowded primary of eight candidates, Mr. Akin won the most with 36%. John Brunner was second with 30% and Tea Party favorite Sarah Steelman finished third with 29%. While Mr. Akin did win, it was not exactly a swarm of Republican voters. The argument can be made that 64% of Missouri GOP voters went with someone else. It is kind of weak, but it can be made that someone else may be able to do better at this point.
    And Mr. Akin needs to show that he can somehow raise the big bucks. Somehow, I do not see him raising that kind of money since most of the big sources have all but dried up. There are only so many small donors in Missouri and even the United States that will pony up at this point.
    If I were those angry with Mr. Akin, and I am one of them, I think that pressure should be kept on him to realize that he needs to leave. But we also should wait and see if this really hurt him with Missouri voters over all. It should not take more than about two weeks to see if that is the case.
    But lets say that Mr. Akin decides against it all to damn the torpedoes and go down gracelessly.
    This is a big question that needs to be asked.
    Can the Missouri GOP coalesce around an acceptable-to-all-sides candidate and officially endorse him or her? In other words, can the state party suggest that Mr. Akin may have won the primary but that he can not be endorsed by the party at all levels? That this, fill-in-the-blank, literally, is the official party candidate?
    And think it is not without precedent?
    As Sen. Joe Miller from Alaska.
    Oops! My bad!
    Mr. Miller was the winner of the Alaska Republican primary in 2010. But incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski did not want to go out quietly. No, she mounted a write-in campaign and she ended up winning reelection.
    I did not like that Sen. Murkowski did what she did. After all, Mr. Miller won the primary fair and square. He did not make any outrageous and frankly dangerous comments that Mr. Akin made. he was leading very well in polls. But she did set a road map for a situation like this. And I think that the Missouri Republican party may want to take a good look at this. One thing that will be to their advantage is that the party could help the write-in candidate. That did not happen for Sen. Murkowski, and maybe this was easier to do in Alaska, but it maybe the only option left to save the election.
    Todd Akin could have done the right thing today and withdraw from the Missouri senate race. He still might, but it will be complicated. If not, Republicans in Missouri may need to have a back up plan. Because a martyr can not be a drag on the whole when it is not necessary except for pride and vainglory.

    Monday, August 20, 2012

    Todd Akin To Take That One Back

    This post may be old before it gets published, but if Missouri Republican congressman Todd Akin is still the official Republican nominee for the senate seat against incumbent Democrat Clare McCaskill at this time tomorrow night, the dude has a real death wish.
    You see, Mr. Akin is an absolutist on the issue of abortion. Mr. Akin opposes all abortion no matter the circumstance. Mr. Akin opposes any abortion even when the life of the mother is threatened. If an incesteous relationship was involved. And in the case of rape.
    It was this question from a St. Louis reporter, Charles Jaco, that Mr. Akin, unbelievably answered this way:

    “Well, you know, uh, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, ‘Well, how do you – how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. You know, I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

    Legitimate rape? A way to shut down that whole thing?
    Oh, where the devil to start?
    So, let me back up a bit.
    Let me make the obvious political observation.
    Mr. Akin should not have been suckered into to going down this road. It is what reporters, and I do not know Mr. Jaco's credentials other than here on Wikipedia, love to do to social conservatives, or from here on out this post, So Cons. They love to take them over the cliff. Mr. Akin went off in a rather spectacular manner if I do say so myself.
    Now, here is the whole transcript in regards to the abortion question. Had I been Mr. Akin, I would have affirmed my pro-life credentials and when Mr. Jaco wanted to go down the specific road, on the issue of rape, I would have answered something like this.
    "Mr. Jaco, I have affirmed my pro-life credentials and will be a voice for the unborn if I am fortunate enough to be elected senator. But the over-arching issues in this election is the massive federal deficit and debt. It is the federal government and implementing Obamacare. It is the over reach of the federal government. It is to return to actually reading and legislating constitutionally. It is to restore our rightful place respected and feared around the world."
    But, nooooooo. Mr. Akin went head first into that pool.
    So let dissect the comment itself because while being totally heartless and cold, it is pretty much not even factual.
    Notice how Mr. Akin uses and interesting word. That word is slice. I may read way more than it is, but slice could be a subliminal message about the abortion proceedure itself.
    What does he mean by "legitimate rape"?
    Last I checked, when a gal says NO to wanting sexual relations and the dude she is with thinks that is a "hell yeah" but reverse psychology on him and forces himself on her, and her continuing to at this point scream NO, that is rape. Period. Are there situations in which women claim to be raped and in fact were not? Yes, that does happen. And sometimes, it is to cover a consenual encounter that produces a child. A child that is not wanted by a mother and father. But most women, the overwhelming majority, who have been raped do know the difference. Again NO means NO. And I am wondering the names of these doctors that he has spoken with that told him about "legitimate" rapes and this theory, one I have never heard of, shutting the whole thing down. Maybe what Mr. Akin really means is that the rape victim ends up taking the advice of former Texas Republican gubenitorial candidate Clayton Williams"If it is inevitable, just relax and enjoy it." Oh yeah, Mr. Williams did not win that race. One Ann Richards went on to win.
    Even the way that Mr. Akin ended the comment is bizarre.
    To state the obvious, that the rapist should be punished. And that it would not be right to "attack" the child.
    Ahh, but it should be some punishment on the rapist. What does that mean? Some punishment? Hey, how about hardcore punishment? You know, real prison time?
    The problem is that judgeing by the previous comment, Mr. Akin generally has a hard to time believing a woman to be raped in the first place.
    And that is a serious problem.
    There are some really bad dudes out there. They do horrible things to women. Some beat 'em. Some trash-talk 'em. Some rape 'em.
    Again, for Mr. Akin's benefit, when a man forces himself on a woman sexually and she says NO and he keeps going, it is  R  A  P  E. Period. No qualifiers.
    Now, while I would have answered the question differently, what if Mr. Akin had simply said what he really meant to say? That he makes no exception in the case of rape? Would he be on the way to being forced out of this senate race? Probably not. It would have crystalized his position, one that I do not agree with.
    Anyone that has read this blog with any regularity know that I am pro-life.
    But I am pro-life with these three exceptions.
    Threat to the life of the mother.
    It is a legitimate position. One of the reasons that I am pro-life is seeing the effects that abortion does have on all involved. But when a mother's life is threatened, with no hope of survival for either the baby or mother, and she can make that decision, she should have that oppertunity. If a mother was involved in an incesteous relationship, I would not expect her to bring a child to full term. There are a lot of reason why that should not be expected. And the same for rape.
    If one does not think I am absolutist on the issue, I am not.
    In the perfect world, Roe vs. Wade would be overturned, abortion laws would return to the states and guess what?
    Some states would ban abortions.
    Some states would allow abortion with very strong restrictions.
    Some states would allow abortion with little restriction.
    Some states would allow abortion in any circumstance.
    Federalism, which delineates power to the states, is not perfect. Why some think that it is a messy thing. But it had worked well until the statists twisted it around to give the central government more power.
    But back to Mr. Akin.
    Why should he get out of this race? I mean, the majority of Missouri Republicans voted to have him be the candidate for the senate, right? In fact. polls showed Mr. Akin pretty far ahead of Sen. McCaskill until this kerfuffle.
    Because this man is not only a loose cannon, but uninformed to make such an assertion that he had to know would potentially come back to haunt him. He made this such an issue of his campaign that he gave a convoluted answer that showed a window on a man that, well he is so out there on a position that made him come off totally with no heart and or compassion.
    Abortion is a serious issue. It is important to have serious people on the side of life. Mr. Akin comes off as a buffoon. And one that can not be trusted. And one that could very much cost the Republican party potential control of the senate. And give the Democrats ammo that they should not have.
    For the sake of the Missouri Republican party and the national Republican party, Congressman Todd Akin must withdraw from the race.

    Thursday, August 16, 2012

    You Know The Dems Are Desperate If They Think A Hilary-For-Biden Switch Will Save The Election

    A morning that started off with ripe speculation that the Dear Leader, President Obama, was going to pull a switch of positions by the end of the day ended up, as I could have told you, with no move made.
    As I was heading for the day job, speculation was rampant that Vice-President Dim Wit Joe Biden would be replaced in his job by the current Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, wife of the former president, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
    I mean, this has been a really crappy week for Vice-President Dim Wit.
    At one campaign rally in Danville, Virginia, our illustrious vice-president made not one, not two, but three major blunders.
    First, Vice-President Dim Wit tried to make a point about what he and the Dear Leader, President Obama, see as a big policy of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney. You must watch the video for the full effect of Vice-President Dim Wit's point. Whether anyone likes it or not, when one from the North does a Southern drawl and says, "He's gonna put y'all back in chains!"
    there is no need for any attempt at "context". Oh, did I mention that the crowd in Danville was more than half Black? Get it? Even though Vice-President Dim Wit was talking about banking regulation and somehow slipped in a loaded phrase in Southern and maybe Black dialect.
    I do not really have to write this, but I will.
    If a White Republican, oh I don't know, maybe Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) had uttered the phrase to a Black audience, would he be the Republican vice-presidential nominee beyond 48 hours?
    OK, while talking like a clown to said Virginia audience, he implores the multitudes to get out and work hard. So that Team Dear Leader can win. North Carolina.
    Last I knew, one can not be in two places at once. I guess unless you are our illustrious vice-president. I think he is on two planets at once.
    And to top that off, according to some reports, Vice-President Dim Wit was mocking the woman to his left doing the sign-language for those hard-of-hearing and or deaf.
    Brilliant I say! Frickin' brilliant!
    So today, The Weekly Standard fueled rampant speculation that today maybe a big day in the Democrat presidential campaign.
    OK, it did not happen. One can not look at a White House schedule and assume much of anything.
    It is known that when the president and vice-president do lunch, it is usually on a Thursday afternoon.
    So, what about this meeting with Mrs. Clinton? Why the three of them together?
    Does not matter because of this writing, Vice-President Dim Wit is still a heartbeat away from the presidency.
    OK, this conservative Republican is going to explain to the panicky Dems why there will not be a switch in vice-presidents unless Vice President Dim Wit dies before the election.

    1) The Dear Leader, President Obama, can not admit the biggest mistake he made-before becoming president.
    Yup, on that fateful day back in 2008, a Saturday afternoon in August then Democrat senator Messiah Barack asked one of the longest-serving senators in history to be his vice-president. We on the Republican side and the right laughed uproariously. Democrats thought it was brilliant because they kind of thought then Sen. Dim Wit was brilliant. At the time, I said that this decision will come to haunt then Sen. Messiah Barack. While Sen. Messiah Barack did win the election, it was certainly because of Sen. Dim Wit. I would say it was despite him. The United States was war-weary and economically on the ropes. And like it or not, Sen. Messiah Barack was saying all the right things.
    Since the election, Vice-President Dim Wit has made gaffe after gaffe after gaffe. But one thing is that he singlehandedly forced the Dear Leader, President Obama, to finally come out of the closet and publicly support same-sex marriage. But by doing so way before the Democrat convention in two weeks, opponents have been able to mobilize and probably will be part of the voting coalition that votes out the Dear Leader, President Obama and Vice-President Dim Wit. I believe that if the Dear Leader, President Obama, had to do it all over again, he would have asked Hillary Clinton.

    2) A switch this late reeks of total desperation.
    Of course it does. How can anyone spin it that it does not look like as the Dear Leader, President Obama, is slipping he suddenly pulls off a switcharoo? Not event the Obamawhore media would be able to pull it off without looking like buffoons. If any one thinks that Mrs. Clinton will save the day without huge concessions on the Dear Leader, President Obama's part, again, they are kidding themselves. Had a switch been seriously contemplated, it would have occurred at the beginning of this year. Again, unless Vice-President Dim Wit dies before the convention, he will be on the ticket. Timing is everything, and doing such a monumental change now would prove to be desperate.

    3) Possible constitutional problems.
    If a switch is to be made, what would happen to Vice-President Dim Wit Biden? Would he serve the term to January 20, 2013? If not and it was to be Mrs. Clinton, she would have to be confirmed by the senate. Won't. Happen. Republicans would do all in their power to keep the vice-presidency vacant. Because guess who would then be next in line? Speaker of the House, Republican John Boehner. A very real reason that this change will not happen.

    4) Why would Mrs. Clinton want to help the Dear Leader, President Obama, and vice versa?
    Exactly! The reality is that Mrs. Clinton would not want to really help the Dear Leader, President Obama, save his sorry butt. And he may not want to see Mrs. Clinton actually succeed him should, God forbid, he win a second term. I think that while there is cordial, professional relationship between the two, I do not think that they like each other. If she were to somehow step up and they lose, it will be hard for her to be a real front runner for the Dems in 2016. Just a fact. And if they were to win, who would really be in charge? See reason number two again.

    5) All this exposes a weak, tired and old Democrat bench.
    The fact of the matter is that in 2016, Mrs. Clinton will be 70 years old. Vice-President Dim Wit Biden, should he not be committed to a supervised senior housing center, would be a ripe old 76. What about the new generation of Democrats? Who are they? Look at the congressional leadership, almost all fossils themselves. Again, while Mitt Romney would also be 70 years old, look at a Vice-President Paul Ryan, not yet even 50 years old. And congressional leaders, some about the same age as Mr. Ryan as well as many governors.

    Though I went through a list, not nearly full at that, the short reality is that Hillary Clinton will not be the vice-presidential candidate under the Dear Leader, President Obama. Dim Wit Joe Biden is it. And once again, it will prove to be a possible costly choice of judgement made by Barack Obama.
    I leave you with this thought.
    To get out of a room, choose who worries you more as vice-president or potential vice-president. Joe Biden or Sarah Palin?

    Why Do Rockers Harass REPUBLICAN Candidates For Using Their Songs?

    Here is the latest example of a rock band that does not like when a Republican candidate, in this case presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney vs the Silversun Pickups.
    Well, the Silversun Pickups not only do not like the Romney/Ryan campaign using their hit song Panic Switch, but they proclaim their utter dislike for Mr. Romney.
    So, because of their blind dislike of Mr. Romney, Silversun Pickups issued a cease and desist order that essentially bans the Romney/Ryan team from using it and any of their other songs at campaign events. They base the claim on the fact that the Romey/Ryan did not ask for their permission to use the particular song.
    OK, the band probably has a marginal point. That Team Romney/Ryan should have asked for permission to use the song. But, judging by the overall reaction of the band, I think that would be a big fat nay!
    Silversun Pickups mail objection is that using their song at an eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll Romney/Ryan rally implies they support the GOP team. Maybe some people would believe that. But the majority of people at any given GOP rally know that some music is canned to fire up the crowd. I am certain that the majority of people in a GOP rally crowd probably are muttering "What?! I can't understand a word of that song!"
    Give Team Romney/Ryan credit that they are using pop/rock music at campaign events. While I do not expect a boatload of young people to suddenly become part of America's Comeback Team, it shows a willingness that often belies Republican campaigns of any kind.
    But the larger picture is this.
    Why do rockers and bands have an immediate dislike when their songs are used at campaign rallies? Especially Republican ones?
    Confession time.
    I like the Silversun Pickups. Good music. Kind of popish, but a lot of lesser known  songs have more of an edge, such as The Royal We.
    But again, methinks that these bands just want to make sure that they are seen as anti-establishment. Not realizing that if their dude is the Dear Leader, President Obama, they are supporting the establishment. It is indeed truly anti-establishment to support conservatives and or Republicans.
    These bands are short sighted because, here is a dirty little know fact. A lot of conservatives and Republicans do like rock music. A lot like alternative, metal, all kinds of rock music. By seemingly making a big deal about Team Romney/Ryan using Panic Switch, they are potentially alienating a lot of fans.
    Someone like myself pretty much expect this from bands that I like. So if I really like a band and know that they are out there on this kind of stuff, I will comment on it, but it will not make me dislike them. Another substantive difference between most conservatives and most liberals. As I wrote, I will not suddenly hate Silversun Pickups but question their open dislike, no hate against Mr. Romney. Band lead singer Brian Aubert said this according to the gossip website

    "We don't like people going behind our backs, using our music without asking, and we don't like the Romney campaign. We're nice, approachable people. We won't bite. Unless you're Mitt Romney!"

    Like I wrote, they don't like Mr. Romney and would not have let them use the song had they asked.
    That is their right. But banning their song from being played is just being spiteful. Again some fans could take this personally. I do not.
    The bigger lesson both sides should take from this is that it is important that Republican staffs should at the very least ask a band for permission using their music. And to be clear that it is not going to be used as a sign that said band supports a candidate if they do not. They could be very surprised. And bands should not over react and sound so, well so establishment. With all the ways that music can and is accessed today, and free publicity never hurts, they should see it as a way to reach a potential new audience.
    Rockers, lighten up and Republicans, just ask next time you want to use a song. That way everyone can be happy.
    Oh, Brian Aubert. We Republicans are nice, very approachable people. And we don't bite either. And even though you are wrong politically, I still like you and your music.

    Friday, August 10, 2012


    *-Just in case I am wrong, but the tea leaves do say otherwise

    In less than eight hours, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is expected to announce that he will ask United States Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to be his running mate in the 2012 presidential election.
    So as I note the tea leaves.
    Consider this earlier today report from Robert Costa of National Review Online. He may have been the one to call it and do so early.
    Jim Geraghty at the Campaign Spot explained how this now seems to be the way it goes down, based on the way Team McCain did it in 2008.
    If one thinks that this is all a head fake and Mr. Romney is going to have someone else with him in Norfolk, Virginia in front of the U. S. S. Wisconsin, this reporting from Stephen Hayes and Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard would suggest that the Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, is ready to go all out regarding the choice.
    Again, I do not believe it is a head fake of any kind. This is it.
    So, what to make of this choice?
    I think that it is a great choice.
    Paul Ryan is the man that gets the problem in Washington. He wants to address cutting the debt, deficit and entitlement reform. He is totally on board with repealing and replacing the horrible Obamacare. He is veteran enough in Washington, yet still is seen as an outsider. He is a hawk on foreign policy. He is a Roman Catholic. And he is young.  Mr. Ryan is 42 years old.
    Yes, I would have loved to see someone like the South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, or United States senator, Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), but these are important people that need to be where they are. Mr. Rubio is probably one of, if not the leading conservative voice in the senate. He too is young and one can see him as a senate majority leader possibly sooner rather than later. After all, he was the Speaker of the House in the Florida House of Representatives.
    Mrs. Haley needs to continue her reform agenda in Columbia. No doubt she is a fighter and survived a horrible primary and a narrow election win in 2010. And she has hit some bumps in the road. But reform, ah it is always hard. Ask Sarah Palin.
    Paul Ryan will make a great number two and a superior vice-president to the dim bulb occupying that position today,  Joe Biden.
    Tomorrow at this time, it will be official.
    And the real campaign begins in earnest.

    Thursday, August 09, 2012

    Desperate Obamawhoring

    OK, I will be the first to admit that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has not had the best couple of weeks. The reasons will be addressed in another post.
    This post is about the Leftywhore/Obamawhore media (one in the same, folks) and their shilling for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
    In this article in today's Left Angeles Times here is another case in point.
    It is about wind energy in Iowa.
    Well, it is really about how Mr. Romney wants to let a wind-energy tax credit expire and supposedly this is the issue that will turn against Mr. Romney.
    And the article says that many conservatives are upset with Mr. Romney's position. Why the article even has extensive thoughts from a Rob Hach. And the article dutifully notes Mr. Hach is a "life-long Republican". And whats more, he is sooo mad at Mr. Romney that he will vote for the Dear Leader, President Obama, in the fall election. Later in the article it claims that Mr. Hach is a conservative. And further more, he does not want a handout.
    OK, a couple of things.
    When the Leftywhore/Obamawhore media use the term "life-long Republican", it is immediately to be suspect. They just take what someone says at face value. Most of the time, it will turn out that the so-called "life-long Republican" is more or less not a conservative and one that has on more than one occasion voted for a Democrat.
    And when one claims to be  a conservative, says that they do not want a government handout and yet ate at the front of the line for a tax credit, this is not a conservative. In fact, the article says this about people like Mr. Hach:

    Wind advocates say they just need a few more years of government help to get the industry on its feet.

    Did the automakers back in the day need government to help it along? Hey, how about airplanes? Radios? One can go on and on.
    If the wind industry needs such help, it is probably not ever going to get off it's knees let alone on their feet.
    To be fair, the article did point  out that there are Iowa voters that don't care about wind tax credits.
    There were quite a lot of people out to see Mr. Romney this past Wednesday and many shared the views of a small businessman, Chris Bobst:

    "I think they should eliminate all tax credits. I own a small business. When it isn't working out, no one bails me out."

    Bingo! Give this dude a cigar! He is spot on!
    As a Republican and conservative, I believe that Mr. Bobst represents what the party really believes. Mr. Hach believes in a pipe dream. One that the federal government can not afford at this time with looming deficits and debt so far out that the eyes of all Americans can not see it.
    But the thrust of the Times article is that see, Mr. Romney is turning off his own base. Why "life-long Republicans" are not only going not vote for him, but some will vote against him.
    It is one of the oldest Leftywhore/Obamawhore media tricks. It is trotted out almost on cue every election cycle.
    However, what is almost never reported is a story the other way. About disgruntled Democrats. How they are not happy with their leader. How some "life-long Democrats" will not vote in November. Or even some that will vote for the Republican.
    Nope, never see those stories, do you?
    It is as I wrote in the headline.
    Desperate Obamawhoring.
    It is not serious reporting and or analysis. If it where then there would be a similar article about the Democrats. But rarely is there one.
    And note this because it is very important.
    Republicans usually need more Democrats to vote for them than Democrats need Republicans to vote for them.
    So there has to be disgruntled Democrats.
    It is too bad that the so-called mainstream media seems to never notice that.
    It is always and only about disgruntled Republicans.

    Tuesday, August 07, 2012

    Is Romney Really Leading In Some Of Those Swing States?

    The short answer to the headline is yes.
    The complicated answer is probably.
    The out there answer is hell yes!
    At this link to Real Clear Politics, if you look over at the Battleground polls, the 12 states featured 10 of them show the Dear Leader, President Obama, in a lead of some kind. Only two of the twelve, Missouri (why it is considered a battleground state beats me) and North Carolina (slowly but surely moving out as a battleground state) are in Mr. Romney's camp.
    So lets look at this state by state starting with the Dear Leader, President Obama. This will go from the smallest lead to the largest according to the RCP state polling average.

    Iowa                              Obama +1.3%
    Florida                           Obama +1.4%
    Colorado                       Obama +2.7%
    Virginia                         Obama +2.8%
    New Hampshire            Obama +3%
    Ohio                              Obama +4.3%
    Nevada                          Obama +5.3%
    Wisconsin                     Obama +6%
    Michigan                       Obama +6.3%
    Pennsylvania                 Obama +7%

    The only one the 10 states that at this point look out of reach for Mr Romney is Pennsylvania. But I would not call this the way it it will go down in Pennsylvania or any of the other seemingly Dear Leader, President Obama states.
    The average lead of the 10 states is 4.1% and in most polling data, it is within the margin of error.
    Now, look at the two Romney states that are still considered battleground states.

    North Carolina            Romney +1%
    Missouri                      Romney +5.7%

    The two Romney states show him ahead by an average of 3.4%. Also in the margin of error.
    But, of the Dear Leader states, Colorado is slowly going away from him. The fact that the Dear Leader is barely ahead in Virginia should be cause for concern. Ditto New Hampshire. And then there is Ohio.
    Ohio is the state that can and will determine the election. At least for Mr. Romney. For no Republican has ever won the White House without winning Ohio. It is just that. Is it possible that this year history can change?
    Because other than Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and at this point, I think that there is something that is at play here.
    That people are still nervous about telling pollsters that they are not going to vote for the Dear Leader, President Obama. Regrettably, this is the fear of being called a racist. Even though one is anonymously answering a pollster's question, there is about five percent of any given state poll in which I do not believe the potential voters are answering honestly.
    Some have referred to this as The Bradley Effect and it is in reference to the 1982 gubernatorial campaign between the Black Democrat mayor of Los Angeles and the Republican Attorney General, George Deukmejian.
    In that election, poll after poll showed Mr. Bradley with a healthy lead over Mr. Deukmejian. And even on election day, exit polls seemed to show that Mr. Bradley would have been the first elected Black governor in California's history.
    One thing happened.
    A then new phenomenon called absentee voting was taken total advantage of by the Republican party. That year thousands if not millions of mailer were sent to Republican and Republican leaning voters asking them to register absentee and vote from the comfort and total privacy of their homes.
    What happened is that Mr. Bradley barely won the majority of votes on election day and Mr. Deukmejian won a strong majority of the absentee votes and won the election by about 50,000 votes.
    Yet why it is called the Bradley effect is that people were telling pollsters sure, they were going to vote for Mr. Bradley but some decided at the last minute to vote for Mr. Deukmejian. Or intended to all along but did not answer honestly for fear of being accused of raaaaacism.
    Remember, there are five a's in racism to drive the point home!
    Thus, I really believe that when all is said and done, Mr. Romney will win the following of the 10 battleground states currently leaning to the Dear Leader, President Obama (and the electoral votes)

    Iowa                       6
    Florida                  29       
    Colorado                9      
    Virginia                13
    New Hampshire     4      
    Ohio                     18
    Nevada                  6

    And add the two states that are leaning to Mr. Romney:

    Missouri                10
    North Carolina      15

    That, my friends, is 110 electoral votes.
    And in the election of 2008, the Dear Leader, President Obama, had 365 electoral votes. Take away 110 electoral votes and we will be able to call him the former Dear Leader, former President Obama.
    It is regrettable that in this election, and it is already one of the most charged in my lifetime, some people will not be honest with the pollsters. But they will be honest with themselves on election day. And that is why I think Mitt Romney is actually leading some of these battleground states. And that he will win enough to be the 45th president of the United States.

    Monday, August 06, 2012

    How Liberalism Really Does Screw The Rich

    This recent story in the Left Angeles Times may not seem like a big deal for it is a time-honored complaint about any given city and the seeming inability to fill in those potholes.
    But what is really interesting is where this takes place and that the reaction of the local residents is to find a way to Escape From L. A.
    The posh Los Angeles district of Holmby Hills is where this tale takes place. This is pretty much part of the fru-fru areas such as Brentwood and Bel Air. In other words where the rich residents of Los Angeles live.
    And yet surprisingly, the potholes are pretty bad. According to the article, the tow-truck folks from AAA think the area is a gold mine for them based on their calls. And the highlight was on a Paul Kanin who blew out a front tire on his Audi A6.
    A brief interlude.
    Audis are pretty much a car that SWLPL*, so take that for what it is worth.
    Back to point.
    The lack of action to take care of the said potholes has so riled some members of the community that they are seriously looking to leave the city of Los Angeles and ask the equally snooty, yet seperate city of Beverly Hills to annex them.
    The drive is being led by an attorney, of course, named William Fleischman.
    Now, read this quote so that you are illuminated as to the headline:

    "Holmby Hills pays millions of dollars to Los Angeles in property taxes, and we're getting back thousands of dollars in services,"

    And Mr. Fleischman, welcome to the wonderful world of liberalism.
    Ironically, today the Dear Leader, President Obama, referred to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, as Romney Hood. Taking from the poor to give to the rich.
    But the reality is that in Los Angeles, it is the real Robin Hood that happens.
    And Holmby Hills is not alone in their frustration with a city hall that caters to every fringe group in every fringe area leaving a lot of taxpayers, rich and middle class, hung out to dry.
    For years, a portion of the San Fernando Valley, which is essentially Los Angeles with a bunch of names like Sherman Oaks, Van Nuys, West Hills, Granada Hills, Canoga Park and several others had wanted to seceed from Los Angeles and form their own city.
    And guess why they wanted to?
    Because they were getting screwed in how the public services were distritbuted in a city that is over 300 square miles and as diverse as Holmby Hills and South Central Los Angeles.
    While the people in the poorer neighborhoods would disagree, the reality is that because they are more dependent on government services of all kinds, they get most of it.
    And they get it from the San Fernando Valley and the wealthy neighborhoods that are mentioned above.
    Only now that they have an issue, the lack of road maintanence, do they realize how screwed they are in the environs as Holmby Hills.
    And the reason that their neighborhood is not being taken care of in a timely manner is rich.
    Here is Richard Lee, spokestool for the Los Angeles Department of Public Works:

    The city plans repairs years in advance.
    "The Bureau of Street Services recognizes the need for street resurfacing in Holmby Hills and in neighborhoods across Los Angeles. While we sympathize with the concerns of neighbors .... the city wants to make sure it is spending taxpayer money wisely."

    OK, sure Richard.
    I would like to see the planned repairs for 2017, just for the hell of it, Richard. Will these residents get taken care of then? Or do they have to keep getting blown tires for, oh I don't know, whenever they come under the plan?
    Well my wealthy friends, you are seeing what the liberals that are in charge at city hall in downtown Los Angeles really think of you.
    As Mr. Fleischman said, they paid boatloads to all kinds of government and all they are aksing is for a little road repair and they are given the "We'll get back to you" from the city.
    But if they are late on any of the said taxes, well they would probably THEN hear from the city. To pay up.
    But all the poor folks have to do is stir up a little trouble and BOOM! All the liberal pols and their hanger-ons will crawl over each other to talk about how we need to give more money to stop whatever grievence, real and or imagined, they bellow about. And the problem never gets solved while some mid-level schmuck gets his or her hands on taxpayer money and only the good Lord knows what they do with the money.
    Eventually, people start to wise up. But it maybe too late.
    As an eternal optimist, I hope that it is not too late for the city of Los Angeles to maybe get some of their public works people over to Holmby Hills and at the very least do something temporarily until the permanent solution can be done. You know. Because they plan these years ahead.
    The lesson here is that yes, liberal governance does take from the rich. Yes it does give to the poor. And when the rich ask for a little measly road maintanence, they are told they have to wait until the city is good and ready to fix their real problems.

    *-SWLPL-Stuff While Liberal People Like, aka Stuff White People Like.

    HT: An Unmarried Man